Article By David Lindfield
City officials insist no policy change has taken place, but opponents say the practical effect tells a different story.
According to the internal message, Barnes wrote that “all charges related to drug possession and/or drug use will be diverted from prosecution to the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) program,” citing direction from the City Attorney’s Office.
The guidance applies to user-quantity cases, while drug dealers and individuals ineligible for diversion will continue to face prosecution.
Barnes told officers they are still expected to make arrests when probable cause exists.
The Seattle Police Department (SPD) disputed claims that enforcement is being rolled back.
In a statement, the SPD insisted that officers will continue to make arrests in drug-related cases and that police policy “remains unchanged.”
The department said prosecutors, not police, ultimately decide whether cases move forward.
The SPD noted officers can work with prosecutors to pursue traditional prosecution when diversion is considered ineffective.
Police also pointed to staffing gains and reported crime reductions, saying the department added 165 officers in 2025 and recorded declines in violent and property crime.
Mayor Wilson rejected accusations that her administration has shifted drug enforcement policy.
“There has been no policy change,” Wilson said in a statement.
“You’ll know when I announce a policy change, because I’ll announce a policy change.”
Wilson said she intends to enforce the city’s public-use and possession ordinance in “priority situations” while expanding diversion programs like LEAD in identified hot-spot areas, emphasizing urgency, resources, and measurable outcomes.
Critics, however, remain unconvinced.
In a column for Seattle Red, conservative commentator Jason Rantz argued that diverting the majority of possession and public-use cases away from prosecution weakens accountability, regardless of how the policy is described.
Rantz wrote that when arrests are not followed by prosecution, “the message to offenders” is that public drug use carries few meaningful consequences.
Concerns have also emerged from within the police ranks.
Speaking on Rantz’s radio program, Seattle Police Officers Guild President Mike Solan sharply criticized the approach described in the internal email.
Solan is warning that it places public safety at risk and normalizes open drug use.
He told Rantz that widespread diversion of drug-use cases is dangerous and reflects what he described as a misguided political theory of addiction, one he warned could drive increases in crime and overdose deaths, calling the philosophy “suicidal empathy.”
“The recent naive, ignorant political decision to not arrest offenders for open drug use in the City of Seattle is horrifically dangerous and will create more death and societal decay,” Solan said.
“It embodies an enormous flaw in those in our community who think that meeting people where they are who are in the throes of addiction, is the correct path to lift them up.”
Solan also said many officers are skeptical of LEAD, telling Rantz that some avoid making referrals because they believe the program lacks accountability and is driven more by ideology than outcomes.
Similar concerns were echoed by outreach workers.
According to MyNorthwest, Andrea Suarez, the executive director of the nonprofit We Heart Seattle, warned that allowing open drug use in public spaces “enables addiction and accelerates harm,” arguing that enforcement is often what compels individuals into treatment.
She said diversion-only approaches without meaningful consequences fail to disrupt destructive behavior.
There are now growing fears that public drug use, especially when in view of families, could normalize dangerous narcotics abuse, particularly in the eyes of impressionable children.
City officials continue to insist enforcement remains intact.
Seattle Police say officers will still make arrests when probable cause exists, while Wilson maintains there has been “no policy change” and that the city will enforce drug laws in “priority situations” while expanding diversion efforts in high-impact areas.
Be the first to comment